POLL: If you were improving your method, would you seek more setups or fewer of them?

[Gabfly1]

Quote from Hello:

This has to be one of the dumbest f%&*$%* questions in the history of ET, and that is saying alot...

"All else being equal," with a profitable method, obviously you want to take as many setups as possible...

You call recognising fewer setups intentionally "tightening," Why in the hell would someone intentionally try to take less setups if they had a system which is profitable...

The question was NOT "Would you rather have more or fewer setups, all else being equal?" Rather, it was "If you were IMPROVING your method, would you seek more or fewer setups?" Read the thread title. The "all else being equal" part I referred to in my earlier post has more to do with NOT just having your cake and eating it too, by saying "I want more setups with greater reliability." We all do. But this is a thread about tradeoff. If you were looking to IMPROVE your method, which of the two criteria would you focus on more? See how that works? If my first post was not sufficiently clear, I apologize. However, my subsequent posts clarified on the matter of tradeoff. Where were you?

Quote from Hello:

...i sometimes question my own intelligence...

What a coincidence. I also sometimes question your intelligence.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from Barth Vader:

I wonder how you could possibly make that assumption ?

I have read several of gabby's remarks regarding trading and it is my impression that he respects the art and craft of trading.

Now, if you would like to talk about his politics

Quote from Mnphats:

What he said. Especially about the politics.

Thank you, gents. Much obliged. And ditto to you guys about your politics.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from BSAM:

Off topic Tdog, but why did you register another name? Bring back the dog.

I was banned for some reason last October. I asked why, and was not given a reason. It certainly had nothing to do with marketing anything, as my post history will confirm. Thanks for asking.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from spindr0:

The goal is to increase account value. Does it really matter how many trades it takes to get there?

No, it doesn't. But that's not what this thread is about. It's about the overriding direction you would prefer to take if you were looking to improve your own method of trading, whatever it may be.

 

[trader#21]

I'll tell you one valuable thing:

Increasing setups can help you diversify risk. You can have various setups like opening print, first hour reversals, last hour squeeze etc. and achieve great consistency.

If that is not the case(which is highly unlikely), I will stick to fewer setups "all else being equal".

 

[FattBurger]

Quote from Gabfly1:

Perhaps this is a better way of posing the question for what I think may have been a somewhat misunderstood poll earlier:

http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=189531&highlight=POLL

As I see it, all else being equal, seeking to adjust a method to recognize fewer setups is somewhat like tightening your game, whereas seeking to adjust that method to recognize more setups is akin to loosening your game. The tradeoff, therefore, is between the fear of missing out and the fear of losing.

Just like poker, most hands should be thrown away, only play the best setups. Thats being a professional.

 

[spindr0]

Quote from Gabfly1:

No, it doesn't. But that's not what this thread is about. It's about the overriding direction you would prefer to take if you were looking to improve your own method of trading, whatever it may be.

No offense but your perspective is rather myopic. The number of trades I make is inconsequential. So is the amount of commission I pay as are the trading stats (win/loss ratio, avg profit per trade, etc.). All I care about is a better bottom line. How I get there is irrelevant to me.

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from spindr0:

...All I care about is a better bottom line. How I get there is irrelevant to me.

Okay, then that's your answer. In retrospect, I suppose I could have included a third option in the poll to accommodate your view for those respondents who share it. I just figured that people would have a preference given the choice in this hypothetical scenario. Hindsight, eh?

 

[Gabfly1]

Quote from trader#21:

I'll tell you one valuable thing:

Increasing setups can help you diversify risk. You can have various setups like opening print, first hour reversals, last hour squeeze etc. and achieve great consistency...

I agree. The opposite side of the coin is that if you have fewer setups with greater reliability, then you can leverage those trades better while maintaining a relatively Gravol-free equity curve. I imagine it is about finding the perceived middle ground providing the "best" combination of frequency and reliability. The proverbial "sweet spot." The question is, in which direction is that perceived optimal middle ground for you from where you are standing right now.

 

[trader#21]

Quote from Gabfly1:

if you have fewer setups with greater reliability, then you can leverage those trades better while maintaining a relatively Gravol-free equity curve.

Practically thats very exceptional. Edges change over time and if you commit yourself to one method/theory you will have a very tough time when the edge disappears/diminishes.